What do you find is slow in Bookends?
Jon
Sonny Software
Universal Code for Bookends
Pretty much everything is slow on intel mac and this is a MBP with 1gb ram. For example startup is very slow compared to Sente (and I'm sorry to mention them but they are the competition, right?). Not snappy at all on Intel compared to universal apps.Jon wrote:What do you find is slow in Bookends?
Jon
Sonny Software
I understand, from previous posts, that you have an Intel mac. Try it and compare the responsiveness, you will see what I mean.
IMO, priority one has to be a universal binary. Please.
Re: Bookends slow on new 2.0 GHz MacBook
Please contact me directly and we'll discuss what the problem might be (e.g. inadequate database cache).jdelaney wrote:By far the slowest program on my system, and that includes other non-universal binaries.
Jon
Sonny Software
-
Wilder Robles
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 5:29 pm
MacBook
I am running Bookends in a new MacBook. I found Bookend VERY slow. I believe this is because Bookend has not yet been ported to the new hardware. Emulation works fine but is very slow. Hope this is address soon,
Wilder
Wilder
-
scaramanga
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:26 pm
Macbook
Hi there - I'm a new user of Bookends with a Macbook, partly seduced by the Mellel deal 
I too find that it runs very slowly. When I click on a reference, it takes about a second for it to be highlighted. At the moment, I only have nine references. I'm very worried that, as my list of references grows, it's going to get slower and slower. It also takes some time to load as well.
For the record, I have a Macbook 2GHz with 2GB Ram.
I know that you've said a Universal version is in the works and that it's never an idea to give an exact date for these things, but do you think it will be this year? If it is then I should be able to live with things as they are for the time being, otherwise I think I might need to try this Sente thing, even though I didn't like the look of it before
I too find that it runs very slowly. When I click on a reference, it takes about a second for it to be highlighted. At the moment, I only have nine references. I'm very worried that, as my list of references grows, it's going to get slower and slower. It also takes some time to load as well.
For the record, I have a Macbook 2GHz with 2GB Ram.
I know that you've said a Universal version is in the works and that it's never an idea to give an exact date for these things, but do you think it will be this year? If it is then I should be able to live with things as they are for the time being, otherwise I think I might need to try this Sente thing, even though I didn't like the look of it before
-
scaramanga
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:26 pm
What you are seeing is not normal, and has absolutely nothing to do with running Bookends on a MacTel (I'm doing that right now, and highlighting a reference is virtually instantaneous). Since no one who is complaining has actually contacted me directly with more details (and their database, for example) there is not much I can do. If you are serious about resolving this, please contact me at
support@sonnysoftware.com
Jon
Sonny Software
support@sonnysoftware.com
Jon
Sonny Software
Re: UB
thecritic wrote:It's silly to want Universal Binaries for that. Have you heard of SpellCatcher X? It gives you a much more full-featured system-wide spellchecker (and more) that works in just about any app -- and also integrates with OS X's system wide spellchecker!
I hadn't known about this app, but I still stand by my original post. The OSX spell-checker runs rings around this app in at least one area: price. I don't need a $40 beast to be checking my spelling when I type in Bookends, which I don't do that often anyway. I just need something good enough that will catch my "teh"s and "adn"s.
I'm in line with everybody else waiting for the UB. Although my experience with Bookends 9.0.5. on my MacBook 2GHz/2GB is not as bad as some people here are describing, there is definitely a sluggishness associated with it that's characteristic of all PowerPC apps running under Rosetta.
-
dspedersen
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:25 pm
I have just purchased Bookends 9.0.5 today after a trial run on my new MacBook 2.0 GHz w. 2 GB RAM.
It works very well with Word 2004, why I decided to buy the app. So far I haven't experienced any sluggishness as of yet, but I have yet to fill up the database(s).
Looking forward to the uni-bin version, though.
cheers,
Dan
It works very well with Word 2004, why I decided to buy the app. So far I haven't experienced any sluggishness as of yet, but I have yet to fill up the database(s).
Looking forward to the uni-bin version, though.
cheers,
Dan
Some basic benchmarks
Jon,
I appreciate your need to have users' qualitative impressions backed up with actual performance data. I finally got around to running a very mini-shootout to test Bookends' performance on a G4 vs on an Intel Core Duo.
The test beds: a MacBook Pro 15" 1.83 GHz with 1.5 GB RAM vs. a PowerBook G4 12" 1.5 GHz with 768 MB RAM. Both running OS X 10.4.6 and Bookends 9.0.5. I used my everyday library file, which has 125 references. I rebooted both computers, let them auto-connect to my home wireless network, and then launched Bookends.
Application launch: 14 seconds for both (this is slow for my taste, but apparently not a Rosetta/native issue)
Open a single reference by double-clicking on it in the main window: 3 seconds on the MBP vs 1 second on the G4
"Copy formatted" command after selecting all 125 references (time until the cursor went from stopwatch back to pointer arrow): 10 seconds on the MBP vs 4 seconds on the G4
In this very rudimentary test, it appears that BE suffers about a 2x performance hit on essential tasks while running under Rosetta. The 3 second delay in opening a reference window is especially noticeable by comparison. Bear in mind that the G4 I used has half the RAM, half the CPUs, and a 4x slower system bus, so if anything the shootout is biased toward understating the performance hit of running under Rosetta.
Hope these numbers help.
I appreciate your need to have users' qualitative impressions backed up with actual performance data. I finally got around to running a very mini-shootout to test Bookends' performance on a G4 vs on an Intel Core Duo.
The test beds: a MacBook Pro 15" 1.83 GHz with 1.5 GB RAM vs. a PowerBook G4 12" 1.5 GHz with 768 MB RAM. Both running OS X 10.4.6 and Bookends 9.0.5. I used my everyday library file, which has 125 references. I rebooted both computers, let them auto-connect to my home wireless network, and then launched Bookends.
Application launch: 14 seconds for both (this is slow for my taste, but apparently not a Rosetta/native issue)
Open a single reference by double-clicking on it in the main window: 3 seconds on the MBP vs 1 second on the G4
"Copy formatted" command after selecting all 125 references (time until the cursor went from stopwatch back to pointer arrow): 10 seconds on the MBP vs 4 seconds on the G4
In this very rudimentary test, it appears that BE suffers about a 2x performance hit on essential tasks while running under Rosetta. The 3 second delay in opening a reference window is especially noticeable by comparison. Bear in mind that the G4 I used has half the RAM, half the CPUs, and a 4x slower system bus, so if anything the shootout is biased toward understating the performance hit of running under Rosetta.
Hope these numbers help.
Thanks, zfirst. It appears that different people see different things. I, for example, find no discernable difference between opening a reference with a double-click on my my G4 Mac compared to my Intel Mac -- it's pretty quick on both (quite a bit less than 1 second). I also want to point out that this thread serves no real purpose. I do not need convincing to create a universal binary -- it is a high priority. Everyone can assured that we are working on it, and it will happen as soon as possible. I am also optimizing code in general, and have already come up with a noticable decrease in launch time. Further improvement will follow.
Jon
Sonny Software
Jon
Sonny Software
Hi,
Just a quick followup to illustrate what I meant by difference results on different Intel Macs. I inserted some timing code and quantitated how long it takes to open a reference window with a double click (from double click to being edit-ready). On my 2 GHz Intel iMac (1 gig memory):
First open: 58-66 ticks (a tick is one-sixtieth of a second)
Second open: 32-38 ticks
Third and so on: 32-38 ticks
This is opening a reference window with a double-click, closing it, reopening it (with another reference), closing it, etc.
After the first open things are about twice as fast because of caching.
You might also want to try installing 10.4.7. After I did, it seemed that the launch time of Bookends 9.0.5 was decreased by about 25%. Is that just my machine, or do you see an improvement, too?
Jon
Sonny Software
Just a quick followup to illustrate what I meant by difference results on different Intel Macs. I inserted some timing code and quantitated how long it takes to open a reference window with a double click (from double click to being edit-ready). On my 2 GHz Intel iMac (1 gig memory):
First open: 58-66 ticks (a tick is one-sixtieth of a second)
Second open: 32-38 ticks
Third and so on: 32-38 ticks
This is opening a reference window with a double-click, closing it, reopening it (with another reference), closing it, etc.
After the first open things are about twice as fast because of caching.
You might also want to try installing 10.4.7. After I did, it seemed that the launch time of Bookends 9.0.5 was decreased by about 25%. Is that just my machine, or do you see an improvement, too?
Jon
Sonny Software
No improvement with 10.4.7
Just installed the update, and I'm still seeing 13-14 seconds for initial launch. Glad to know improvements are coming!